[CamelBackCinema]

Is if you want a reference set of cans... make sure you get the most out of how ever much you want to spend. The A900 with an amp is around the same as a lone CD3K! And I almost guaranteed you will be very satisfied with the A900. It is all about the most you get out of your purchase. But a CD3K with an amp is in some ways leagues better! I have to admit, I am not getting the full value of my CD3K and amp because I am using an Audigy 2ZS soundcard. I am actively looking for a high end soundcard. This is costing me close to a grand but I can only imagine how much I will enjoy listening to Bela Fleck or Norah Jones after my set up is completed.

I agree with Slunk. Save yourself money and get headphones that are probably just as good in context with gaming and 128 bit mp3 listening

Do you care about music enough?

Other things to note is the CD3K, again, is very very versatile and can meet almost all home audio needs. Die SPEAKERS!

 

[itza2mer]

I just got my A900's, and you know what? The synergy with my vintage Marantz 2220b fantastic! I can honesty say that I prefer the A900's over the Sony CD3000's using my Marantz receiver. I do think the CD3000 has a soundstage that is more forward than the A900. I can't imagine how much better they will sound after they've been properly burned in. I just hope I can fight the urge to replace the stock cable with a modded Zu Mobius cable!

 

[OakIris]

Quote:

Originally posted by Bangraman: Tip: Make sure that your mixer/amp is sited to the left of your PC screen.

 

[Geek]

DT250-80

The CD3000s need really expensive tube amps and audiophile sources (read: not a sound card) to sound reasonable. The A900s I have no experience with but from what I hear they are a very colored phone with distorted highs (something you dont want for gaming, you want pure highs to hear footsteps).

Plus the DT250-80 is closed, needs no amp, sounds great out of any source, has great imaging, a decent soundstage, is comfortable, and is very upfront.

Cheers,
Geek

 

[blipblop]

The a900s don't have distorted highs in my opinion, but then again I'm not an expert. They do roll off the highs a touch, but that's perfect for me since it provides a relatively upfront sound without the painful highs often associated with it, i.e., Grado.

 

[Geek]

Also, you aren't going to find a "reference" sound unless you find equipment (including headphones) that is as close to real life as possible (hence "reference"). Almost everything recommended on head-fi is too bright to be neutral and is too detailed to be natural, period. Anyone who knows what real acoustic detail and texture sounds like knows this. Basically, everything I've heard is overhyped sonically, with the two biggest culprits being the upper midrange and highs. Too much texture and detail and it sounds artificial.

What I'm getting at is stick with a warm sounding phone that sounds great no matter whats thrown at it and is very versatile and requires no amp. If you want reference grade you should first be experienced in real live acoustic sound preferably from unamped instruments such as guitar, violin, cello, string bass, horn, flute, drum, etc., and then make a decision based upon how accurately these are portrayed.

For now just have fun casually gaming and listening

Cheers,
Geek

 

[blipblop]

Quote:

What I'm getting at is stick with a warm sounding phone that sounds great no matter whats thrown at it and is very versatile and requires no amp

AMEN!

 

[bangraman]

The reason I said to put the mixer on the left is that the DT770 (and the DT250) have short headphone cords.


Everything I'm going to say under this has little to do with gaming, but more for listening to music. For gaming I still recommend the DT770, and the new 770-80 might be an interesting choice although I can't comment on it.


~~~~


"Reference" does not necessarily mean it's true to real life... And I don't think we use it in such a context. It means that technically, the phone is considered a reference in terms of it's performance. This usually means a fairly flat measured frequency response.


The CD3000 is not reference. It is however definitely high fidelity. It doesnt need expensive equipment. It sounds splendid from fairly cheap tube and solid state amps. Very low-cost modern gear does for the most part have a tendency to sound overly bright with anything, so moving up to a well regarded $400-ish source (used even would be good) would bring about more natural sound.


The best you can hope for from a headphone experience is the magnifying glass effect. That is, an exaggerated sense of detail in which to munch over the music. Try as people might, it's just not possible to get a 'I'm there' feeling with even very good gear, or even a really good surround set-up... although some of them gets very close. That's probably why most people favour bright phones, because it's easiest to pick out detail and to enjoy that headphone experience. The CD3K is bright, but it is perfectly possible to control that brightness. The good thing is that it will be very good to start with, and get better as you upgrade. There is no need for megabuck equipment to start with.


The ATH-A900 is closed usefully isolating, works pretty well unamped from even a 5mw Minidisc, sounds pretty good from any source, has excellent imaging and staging for the money, and is not particularly upfront. It is extremely comfortable but is not portable.


The DT250-80 is closed but is not very isolating, is between the threshold of needing an amp and working well unamplified (as you will see when you use a DT250-80 with a limited power source against an ATH-A900), sounds OK from any source but with always a feeling of "could do better", has reasonable imaging, a reasonable soundstage and is not particularly upfront. It is very comfortable and rather bulky as a whole for portable use but has low profile cups.


Given the choice of a DT250-80 and an ATH-A900 for gaming/audio use, whatever the percentages of either usage I will go for the ATH-A900 every single time. I speak as someone who has experienced live performances, although I'm not sure what that has to do with gaming to start with.

 

[pbirkett]

Quote:

Originally posted by Geek The CD3000s need really expensive tube amps and audiophile sources (read: not a sound card) to sound reasonable. The A900s I have no experience with but from what I hear they are a very colored phone with distorted highs (something you dont want for gaming, you want pure highs to hear footsteps).

Why do you keep peddling this rubbish? Its just not true. I use a sound card, and I use a solid state amp which was not really expensive, and I can assure you they sound a lot more than reasonable. You yourself said your were impressed with the RME, and believe me when I say the Terratec is a good card, the Perreaux also goes great with the CD3000.

 

[lindrone]

Quote:

Originally posted by Geek The CD3000s need really expensive tube amps and audiophile sources (read: not a sound card) to sound reasonable. The A900s I have no experience with but from what I hear they are a very colored phone with distorted highs (something you dont want for gaming, you want pure highs to hear footsteps).

Don't comment on headphones you've got no experience with. Very colored & distorted highs isn't something that anyone should be using to describe the A900's at all.

CD3000's also doesn't require any more equipment to make it sound reasonable than say.. HD600 or HD650.

 

[bangraman]

Perhaps Geek has experience of the CD3000, but only with Headroom amps. I note that he lives in Bozeman, and presumably pops along to them or TTVJ frequently. In the face of such a wall of gear, one could become somewhat elitist in one's outlook even if one cannot personally afford such gear. However as I have recently discovered to my chagrin with a particular phone, trying is not owning. Owning a phone gives you the ability to experiment with set-ups and getting to know them well. No matter how good an audition environment is, that's all it is... an audition. And repeatedly going against legions of happy CD3000 owners when you haven't had one is... well, rather pointless. One could argue that one doesn't need to own it because one did not like it, but that's not really a fair assessment.


I think personally that having listened to back-ends which have been developed with the HD600 specifically in mind, the CD3000 may not please all when plugged into such a back-end. However there are plenty of combinations which will maximise the performance of the CD3000 at an given price point. And you'll find them right here if you do a search.


Back to the thread, the CD3000 is completely overkill for gaming, and I suppose if you are not planning to upgrade your sources or listen to a substantial amount of music, I think the ATH-A900 would be the best bet if the DT770 seems like too much of a chance to take.

 

[OakIris]

Here I am trying to send this thread on another tangent.....sort of related, though (please forgive me Pablo Abularach.)

I currently use a pair of Senn HD590s with my computer - for gaming and for listening to music when I'm in my computer room. (M-Audio Revolution sound card>Kimber interconnects>JMT-built Meta42 headphone amp>Equinox cable>HD590s)

How would the ATH-900s do for this same purpose? Any comparison?

Actually don't have the money right now, but wondering if I should replace my HD-590s with the ATH-900s - or jump on the new flavor of the month (??) the HD-595s...Or just stick with the 590s.

 

[lindrone]

I had the HD590 before in this configuration:

M-Audio Revo => Stefan AudioArt Vision1 => HD590

I didn't use the amp in between, because I really just can't tell any improvement in the HD590 with an amp and without. Vision1 is a lower class cable than the Equinox, so I expect the Equinox to open up the HD590 a little further than the Vision1.

My experience, is that HD590 is comfortable and enjoyable, but I preferred A900 in just about every way. A900's sound is a little more balanced, everything is forward and fun, as opposed to HD590 which is sorta stuck in between this, "I want to be a Sennheiser, but I'm really not" mode. Not that HD590 wasn't great, in fact, I had a hard time making up the decision to get rid of it or not.

Now, I would suspect that Equinox opens up the HD590 and improves its sonic balance even more than my Vision1, which certainly balanced out the sound to be even more enjoyable. However, one thing that was not, and will not be remedied in the HD590 by anyway, is the 3d imaging of sound. Even though HD590 has an airy and wide soundstage, frontal imaging and sound positioning in general is just not as good as the A900.

Now, the advantages with the HD590... they can be worn for much longer period of time.. because they're nice and cool, and very comfortable. A900 is just as comfortable, but since it's closed, it will slowly get warm over time. You will need to take a break once in a while due to the warmth built inside the closed cups. Of course, A900 provides isolation and minimize leaking, while HD590 does no such thing.

I used the HD590 strictly for listening music from the PC. I finally decided to sell it because I like the Sony CD780's softness (even more comfortable, they're like pillows!), but now I regret it just a bit, because even though CD780 is open-air as well, the pillowy padding builds up more heat than the HD590.

Overall, I would say A900 is a step above the HD590... because the sound signature is just more balanced, and the imaging is better.

 

[3lusiv3]

Thanks for that lindrone. Being a 590 owner and considering an A900 as a subsititute for when I want a closed headphone, I find that very useful.

 

[OakIris]

lindrone - another thank you from me! That was a great mini-review of the two headphones.

Not sure I want to get rid of my HD590s (I tend to get possessive!!) but now I really want to try out a pair of the A900s!

When will I stop being tempted by new headphones??